[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm: remove check for generic timer support for arm64
On 06/02/2014 02:30 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Mon, 2014-06-02 at 14:23 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: >> On 06/02/2014 02:03 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: >>> On Mon, 2014-06-02 at 12:13 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: >>>> On 06/02/2014 12:09 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 2014-06-02 at 14:07 +0530, vijay.kilari@xxxxxxxxx wrote: >>>>>> From: Vijaya Kumar K <Vijaya.Kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> >>>>>> arm64 always supports generic timer. So check is not required >>>>>> for arm64. For platforms which supports only aarch64 mode this >>>>>> check always passes and panics >>>>> >>>>> Ah, because the relevant feature flag/register is 32-bit only. >>>>> >>>>> I'd prefer to see this done in the cpufeature header as: >>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_ARM_32 >>>>> #define cpu_has_gentimer (boot_cpu_feature32(gentimer) == 1) >>>>> #else >>>>> #define cpu_has_gentimer (1) >>>>> #endif >>>>> rather than adding #ifdef to the common code. Likewise for any similar >>>>> "always on for aarch64" features. >>>> >>>> AFAIU, the feature flag exists on ARMv8 platform with aarch32 support. >>>> So an ifdef may not be the correct solution here. >>> >>> The flag might exist in the AArch32 feature registers (for compat with >>> v7) but AIUI the feature is not actually optional on v8. >> >> The manual says the ARM Generic Timer is an optional extension to an >> ARMv8 implementation. > > So it does. In that case cpu_has_gentimer should turn into a check of > ID_PFR1_EL1.GenTimer for arm64 builds. This is already the case (without Vijay's patch). But on AArch64-only implementation, this register is RAZ. It looks like ID_PFR{0,1}_EL1 are only used for ARMv7 and ARMv8 which support 32-bit. Regards, -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |